Afgan war and revision of American View

 Endless war in Afganistan

President Barack Obama rejected the Afghanistan war options before him and asked for revisions, administration officials say, amid an argument by his own ambassador in Kabul that a significant U.S. troop increase would only prop up a weak, corruption-tainted government.

Obama's ambassador, Karl Eikenberry, who is also a former commander in Afghanistan, is voicing strong dissent against sending large numbers of new forces, according to an administration official. This puts him at odds with the current war commander, Gen. Stanley McChrystal, who is seeking thousands more troops.

Eikenberry's misgivings center on a concern that bolstering the American presence in Afghanistan could make the country more reliant on the U.S., not less. He expressed them in forcefully worded cables to Washington just ahead of Obama's latest war meeting Wednesday.

At the war council meeting, Obama asked for changes in the four options he was given that could alter the dynamic of both how many additional troops are sent to Afghanistan and their timeline in the war zone, according to another official, who spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss Obama's thinking.

The president wants to clarify how and when U.S. troops would turn over responsibility to the Afghan government, according to the official.

The officials spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss administration deliberations.

Meanwhile, Richard C. Holbrooke, Obama's special representative for Afghanistan and Pakistan, left late Wednesday for consultations with allies in Berlin, Paris and Moscow. British officials also are expected at some point to join the talks, part of a continuing effort to coordinate with allies, brief them on Obama's strategy review and discuss what more they might contribute in Afghanistan.

The developments underscore U.S. skepticism about the leadership of Afghan President Hamid Karzai, whose government has been dogged by corruption. The emerging administration message is that Obama will not do anything to lock in an open-ended U.S. commitment.

U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton on Thursday voiced a list of concerns about Afghanistan: "corruption, lack of transparency, poor governance, absence of the rule of law."

"We're looking to President Karzai as he forms a new government to take action that will demonstrate — not just to the international community but first and foremost to his own people — that his second term will respond the needs that are so manifest," Clinton said during a news conference in Manila with Philippine Foreign Secretary Alberto Romulo.

Obama is still expected to send in more troops to bolster a deteriorating war effort.

He remains close to announcing his revamped war strategy — troops are just one component — and probably will do so shortly after he returns from a trip to Asia that ends Nov. 19.

Yet in Wednesday's pivotal war council meeting, Obama wasn't satisfied with any of the Afghanistan war options presented by his national security team, one official said.

Military officials said Obama has asked for a rewrite before and resisted what one official called a one-way highway toward commander McChrystal's recommendations for more troops. The sense that he was being rushed and railroaded has stiffened Obama's resolve to seek information and options beyond military planning, officials said, though a substantial troop increase is still likely.

The president is considering options that include adding 30,000 or more U.S. forces to take on the Taliban in key areas of Afghanistan and to buy time for the Afghan government's inadequate and ill-equipped fighting forces to prepare to take over. The other three options on the table are ranges of troop increases, from a relatively small addition of forces to the roughly 40,000 that McChrystal prefers, according to military and other officials.

The war is now in its ninth year and is claiming U.S. lives at a record pace as military leaders say the Taliban has the upper hand in many parts of the country.

Ambassador Eikenberry, who was the top U.S. military commander in Afghanistan for two years ending in 2007, is a prominent voice among those advising Obama, and his sharp dissent is sure to affect the equation.

The options given to Obama will now be altered, although not overhauled.

Military officials say one approach is a compromise battle plan that would add 30,000 or more U.S. forces atop a record 68,000 in the country now. They described it as "half and half," meaning half fighting and half training and holding ground so the Afghans can regroup.

"The government of Afghanistan has to accept greater responsibility for its own defense," Clinton said Thursday. She had no comment on the Eikenberry memos.

Among the options for Obama would be ways to phase in additional troops, perhaps eventually equaling McChrystal's full request, based on security or other conditions in Afghanistan and troop levels by U.S. allies there.

The White House has chafed under criticism from Republicans and some outside critics that Obama is dragging his feet to make a decision.

Obama's top military advisers have said they are comfortable with the pace of the process, and senior military officials have pointed out that the president still has time since no additional forces could begin flowing into Afghanistan until early next year.

Under the scenario featuring about 30,000 more troops, that number most likely would be assembled from three Army brigades and a Marine Corps contingent, plus a new headquarters operation that would be staffed by 7,000 or more troops, a senior military official said. There would be a heavy emphasis on the training of Afghan forces, and the reinforcements Obama sends could include thousands of U.S. military trainers.

___

Pakistani soldiers entered the Taliban headquarters

 Pakistani soldiers entered the Taliban headquarters

Pakistani soldiers entered the Taliban headquarters in South Waziristan on Friday, the military said, as gunmen wounded an army brigadier and his driver in a drive-by shooting in the capital. more

The Lockerbie bombing case

Associated Press Writer= LONDON (AP) The Lockerbie bombing case is being reviewed by detectives trying to determine if anyone helped the only person convicted of the attack that killed 270 people on a Pam Am flight over Scotland, police and prosecutors said Sunday.



After Abdel Baset al-Megrahi dropped an appeal against his conviction earlier this year, a review of the evidence was undertaken, the head of the Dumfries and Galloway Police said. More....


"Now that Mr. (al-Megrahi) has decided to abandon his appeal against conviction, a further review of the case is under way in respect of others who acted with him in the murder of 270 people," the statement said. Chief Constable Patrick Shearer said that detectives have previously looked at the evidence to try and find new leads in the bombing, and this review is the latest in a series "which have formed part of an investigative strategy in keeping with our determination to pursue every possible lead."

Pan Am Flight 103, bound from London's Heathrow Airport to New York, exploded over Scotland on Dec. 21, 1988. All 259 people aboard mainly Americans and 11 people on the ground were killed when the airliner crashed into the town of Lockerbie.

The police statement came after a Sunday newspaper reported that British relatives of the victims on Pan Am Flight 103 were told in an e-mail that officers were considering several potential lines of inquiry, including a review of the forensic evidence.

The Sunday Telegraph quoted the e-mail as saying further elaboration would be inappropriate, "but please be assured that this is not simply paying lip service to the idea of an 'open' case."

A statement from the Crown Office Scotland's prosecuting authority said the review does not include the question of al-Megrahi's involvement.

"There is no question of reopening the case against (al-Megrahi)," the statement said. "The open case concerns only the involvement of others with (al-Megrahi) in the murder of 270 people and the Crown will continue to pursue such lines of inquiry that become available."

Al-Megrahi was indicted in 1991 alongside another man, Amin Khalifa Fhimah, with murder and conspiracy to murder. Fhimah was acquitted, but prosecutors at the trial said the pair could not have acted alone.

British Foreign Secretary David Miliband told the BBC that the investigation into the attack never been formally closed, and said it was "wholly appropriate" for police to move forward if there were grounds.

Victims' relatives group UK Families Flight 103 have asked British Prime Minister Gordon Brown for a full, independent, public inquiry into the attack. A Downing Street spokeswoman said they have received a letter from the group and will reply soon.

But Miliband said any inquiry would be a decision for Scottish government.

"This was something that happened over Scottish soil and it was investigated by Scottish authorities," he said. "It is right that they pursue the investigation on a criminal basis and if there is any suggestion of an inquiry, that should be a matter for the Scots."

The Rev. John Mosey, whose 19-year-old daughter Helga died on Flight 103, did not receive an e-mail from prosecutors. Mosey welcomed the review of the case though he was concerned that the government had chosen an investigation over a full, independent inquiry.

"I think this is a damage limitation exercise by the government," he said. "A criminal investigation is too narrow a remit as we want answers to bigger questions, such as why were 15 warnings of an impending attack not heeded?"

Al-Megrahi was freed by Scottish authorities in August on compassionate grounds after doctors said he had terminal cancer. He returned to a hero's welcome in Tripoli, which outraged some victims' families and sparked protests by U.S. officials.

Regional governments in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland are responsible for local issues, while the central government in London retains power over Britain's foreign policy.

"clear mission" In Afganistan

 Life is precious than uncertain war

President Obama pledged on Monday not to "rush the solemn decision" to send more troops to battle in Afghanistan as he weighs military options on what to do next in the troubled war.
"I won't risk your lives unless it is absolutely necessary," Obama told service men and women at Naval Air Station Jacksonville. He promised a "clear mission" with defined goals and the equipment needed to get the job done.
Obama, who is in the process of weighing options put forward by the Pentagon that include various levels of increased troops, spoke of the latest example of the dangers and sacrifices there -- helicopter crashes that killed 14 Americans in the deadliest day for the U.S. mission in Afghanistan in more than four years.
"Fourteen Americans gave their lives. And our prayers are with these service members, their civilian colleagues and the families who loved them," Obama said. "They were willing to risk their lives, in this case to prevent Afghanistan from again becoming a safe haven for Al Qaeda and its extremist allies."
His visit to the naval air station came after he met at the White House with his national security team for a sixth full-scale conference on the future of the faltering war.
The administration is debating whether to send tens of thousands more troops to the country, while the Afghan government is moving to hold a Nov. 7 runoff election between President Hamid Karzai and challenger Abdullah Abdullah. The runoff comes after complaints by international monitors of fraudulent voting in the first election.
But, Obama's critics say the time for him to make a decision is running out.
"Republicans want very much to support the president's decision," Senate Republican Whip Jon Kyl, R-Ariz., told "Fox News Sunday." But he cited Gen. Stanley McChrystal's own warning that U.S. and NATO forces may only have about one year before the insurgency's momentum becomes irreversible.
"It's been more than two months since the recommendation went to the president. And Gen. McChrystal is talking about a 12-month time frame," Kyl said. "So clearly time is of the essence here."
Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., also called for an end to the delay.
"The sooner the decision is made, the sooner we get people over there and are able to implement the strategy that will succeed," he told CBS' "Face the Nation." "Every day we delay will be a delay in this strategy succeeding."
Waves of boisterous cheers greeted the president in Florida. Obama noted that representatives of all the nation's military services attended the gathering.
Obama did not tip his hand on how he might decide.
"I will never rush the solemn decision of sending you into harm's way," he said.
If it is necessary, Obama added, "we will back you up to the hilt."
The Associated Press contributed to this report. 
source:www.foxnews.com 

What's holding India back? Its leaders

Rapid economic growth in the last two decades may have seen India catapult to the global arena but the country is yet to wield the influence of a world power. And lack of good leadership is to be blamed for this.

That brings us to the question that was asked on a special show on the findings of the Hindustan Times CNN-IBN Leadership survey: Is the leadership crisis preventing India from becoming a global power?

On the panel of experts to debate the issue were MP and Congress Spokesperson Manish Tewari; President of Lok Satta Party Jayaprakash Narayan; leader of Professionals Party of India Mona Shah; Deputy Executive Editor of Hindustan Times Rajesh Mahapatra.